BattleTech - The Board Game of Armored Combat
BattleTech Game Systems => General BattleTech Discussion => Topic started by: The_Big_Red_Bear on 26 December 2019, 04:53:20
-
G'day Battletech community!
I became a late backer to the Battletech Kickstarter, and decided to go with a named character and concept art (I'm also actively seeking an artist to draw a sketch for me to pass off to them as a photo reference, I've got an idea in my head for how to present it, lol.)
So, I've got a 15 word quote to work with to best describe who this "person" is going to be. I don't have control over who, or what the folks at Catalyst decide, I'm just seeing if I can steer it in a certain direction. According to their list, I get to get a preference for the rank, mech, and rank this character would possess.
I've got the name down, which will be:
Adam Akimov
For the house, I'm reasonably sure I'm going to choose the FWL.
For the mech, probably something like a VTR, even if that's a tad bit uncommon.
But here is the kicker. For the rank, I'm thinking of either lieutenant-colonel, or colonel, in order to try and edge this towards being an openly nefarious character. I suspect a lot of people (understandably) are going to do self-inserts, I myself, if I opt to upgrade in a few weeks, might even include myself, but if I only do one character, I want to input someone whose a total and complete bastard. Because why not shake things up?
So, in 15 words, who wants to help me paint someone as a war criminal?
So far, I've got this:
"Unfortunately, my reputation precedes me. Exaggerated claims, nothing more. I am a /gentlemen/, I assure you."
"War Criminal? Is that the term they're calling me? How slanderous. Winning is not a crime."
Any and all input for helping forge an arrogant monster, will be greatly appreciated, lol
*I'm also posting this on /r/Battletech.
-
What era? And what books do you have access to? I have a spreadsheet I use to build characters...
-
What era? And what books do you have access to? I have a spreadsheet I use to build characters...
It's a quirk that's apart of the Kickstarter, they leave it nebulous I suspect.
"STAR COLONEL: Starting at this pledge level, you will name a canon character that is guaranteed to appear in future sourcebooks and fiction. The details we will eventually ask players to provide for us are roughly as follows:
Name
Specialty (MechWarrior/Tanker/Nobility/Special Forces, Merchant, etc.)
Gender
Faction (specific Clan, House, Mercenary, Periphery, etc.)
Suggested Vehicles/Equipment
Suggested Combat Command
Suggested Rank
15-word or less character quote"
I'm working out the fiddly bits.
The 15 words or less character quote, is what I'm aiming for, to be something totally damning. :P
-
Oh, I see... not a full AToW work up, then.
Hmmm... that senior going into the invasion... they were probably a junior officer (or enlisted trooper) during Anton's revolt. How about:
"Wolf's Dragoons got everything they deserved working for the traitor Duke!"
-
"Their surrender was a poor choice. I don't regret killing them. Neither should you."
-
"They did it first. Why not one-up them?"
-
“I did my duty.”
-
“War is Hell. They knew that going in. It’s not like they’re innocent.”
-
"Those dumbasses. If they didn't wanna die, then they shouldn't have fought"
-
Common advice on this forum for city fighting:
'Tell the men to loan infernos.'
-
“Those *%#* needed killin’.”
Or
“Yes! They deserved to die and I hope they burn in hell!”
Or
“Great men are forged in fire. It’s the privilege of lesser men to light the flame.”
(Ok, that last one is 16 words. It’s still one of the best quotes from Doctor Who that actually could be used here.)
Edit: “In war, there are no civilians. Only various degrees of combatants.”
Ruger
-
If 15 is a hard limit, you could technically contract "men are" to "men're".
-
"I won't apologize for success."
-
"All of my actions were well within the letter of the law. Stop your whining."
-
"I had my orders. They had theirs"
-
"It was a legitimate military target."
-
Amos Furlough, Stefan Amaris, Jinjiro Kurita, Claudius Steiner, Apollyon - all amateurs compared to me.
-
Any and all input for helping forge an arrogant monster, will be greatly appreciated, lol
*I'm also posting this on /r/Battletech.
If you don't mind going a different direction on the vileness (more Corrupt Corporate Executive than Colonel Kilgore), look up "Sir Basil Zaharoff" for a nasty piece of work that you can use as a template... anyone who can put on their resume "helped get World War One going so I could turn a tidy profit" deserves everything karma would throw their way. ;D
In fact, in a MW:D campaign I'm setting up, Zaharoff is going to be mercilessly exploited as the basis for a possible Big Bad the party could tangle with. One quote I have for him is:
"Oh, I can break you. I don't have to lift a finger, and it may not even physically hurt. But you will be broken."
-
The most obvious is: "I was only following orders." With the Free Worlds League and their factionalism you could also do: "I didn't betray the League, the League betrayed my home." I like: "Whoever said war is Hell? I enjoy myself all the time" for a more sadistic vibe.
-
"My list of victories carries far more weight than any list of alleged crimes."
-
To steal one from somewhere else, "Killin' is my business and business is good."
-
"Loading infernos is always a good idea. I don't care that I disobeyed worthless orders."
I'm not sure what noodle incident that quote refers to exactly, but I'm pretty sure that whoever said it is not a hoopy frood.
-
"Incompetent politicians cause wars. Blaming commanders for wars is like blaming doctors for diseases."
"I won the war, the enemy would have killed you. I'll remember that next time."
"You cannot judge me. Victory is above pedestrian morality. You should be thanking me."
-
To be historically correct (if far less than 15 words): "An order is an order."
-
"Wipe them out, all of them"
"You may fire when ready"
"... It was the only way to be sure"
-
What is the military phrase for 'officer safety'?
They were out of my line of sight. I didn't see them.
-
I don't seek out nor fear death, but accepted the inevitability of death, mine and others
or
No one wants to die to a unknown, therefore my reputation means is their death worthwhile
-
"What I did there, was for the good of everyone, including the people who were unfortunate collateral damage."
there's a concept out there that the more frightening sort of fanatic, is the one who believes his cause is righteous, just, and humane in the long term. See, those guys are the ones who won't ever feel a shred of guilt over committing real atrocities, because they honestly believe they're doing 'good' in the long term, and that the ends justify the means.
-
"War crimes? You need me and my army more than I need you."
"It's a crime against humanity to call them human, the same way we are human."
"I ordered all the prisoners killed...and bought our people one more generation of peace."
-
"Crimes? I'll not be judged by men who've never stood the wall."
-
Thanks so far everyone!
Right now the ones I'm liking most are:
"You cannot judge me. Victory is above pedestrian morality. You should be thanking me."
"Their surrender was a poor choice. I don't regret killing them. Neither should you."
"The law is quiet in war. Victory had a small price. I made sure they paid it."
"What I did there, was for the good of everyone, including the people who were unfortunate collateral damage."
"It's a crime against humanity to call them human, the same way we are human."
"War crimes? You need me and my army more that I need you."
"Crimes? I'll not be judged by men who've never stood the wall."
-
“Do I have nightmares? About screaming children? Burning bodies? No, I have no such fantasies.”
-
"Remind the losers that only the victors have the right to make accusations."
"The only crime is any war is losing, I guess I have to remind them."
"I'm accused of what? That's it, my Atlas needs a fresh coat of blood."
Heh, these are lines I've used in one form or another...
-
War crimes? I love the sound of that. I need a bloody colored wine now.
-
"My job was to win. That city was an acceptable price to pay for victory."
-
If the civilians didn't want it deployed, why did they pay to have it made?
-
No general. There is no way it could be more on fire
-
I've got another one I came up with today:
"War Criminal? *smirks* You mean my legacy. Each 'crime' represents another step towards victory, and destiny."
-
"Kill them all, Blake will know his own"
"The only war crime I've witnessed was the incompetence of my opponents."
"One man's war crime is another man's decisive victory"
"War crimes are words civilians use when confronted with the true cost of victory"
"You call that a War crime? You'll need a new term for the encore."
-
"One death is a tragedy. A million deaths is a live-fire exercise."
-
"Your miscalculation of the costs is responsible for this, you should have considered the price before you asked me to do this for you."
-
Some of General Zod's comments to Kal-el before Kal snapped his neck.
-
I've got another one I came up with today:
"War Criminal? *smirks* You mean my legacy. Each 'crime' represents another step towards victory, and destiny."
These kinds of quotes are characteristic of mass murderers, serial killers, and the like, but not really war criminals.
Mass murderers and serial killers are usually aware that they have transgressed against fundamental tenets of human society and even seek to capitalize on those transgressions for their own gain (however twisted). They commit immoral acts and usually know it.
War criminals are often not aware that they have committed evil acts. In their minds, they simply did their job. Their moral failure is not in their intent to do evil. Rather, they fail to stand up to or question authority when commanded to do evil. They commit amoral acts and usually don’t know it.
I don’t want to cause a Rule 4 violation, but it’s enlightening to read about the Nuremberg trials and similar. Setting aside the deranged leaders at the top, the concentration camp commanders and the rank-and-file responsible for the executions didn’t see themselves as doing evil or seek to justify their acts beyond doing their duty.
That’s very different from the mass murderer who seeks revenge or to be taken seriously by bringing automatic weapons into a workplace or school. It’s also very different from a serial killer who derives pleasure from the act and/or fame from the cat-and-mouse game with authorities.
Of course, “I did my duty” isn’t nearly as interesting as anything Hannibal Lecter or the like has to say. But it’s also more realistic.
FWIW...
-
These kinds of quotes are characteristic of mass murderers, serial killers, and the like, but not really war criminals.
Mass murderers and serial killers are usually aware that they have transgressed against fundamental tenets of human society and even seek to capitalize on those transgressions for their own gain (however twisted). They commit immoral acts and usually know it.
War criminals are often not aware that they have committed evil acts. In their minds, they simply did their job. Their moral failure is not in their intent to do evil. Rather, they fail to stand up to or question authority when commanded to do evil. They commit amoral acts and usually don’t know it.
I don’t want to cause a Rule 4 violation, but it’s enlightening to read about the Nuremberg trials and similar. Setting aside the deranged leaders at the top, the concentration camp commanders and the rank-and-file responsible for the executions didn’t see themselves as doing evil or seek to justify their acts beyond doing their duty.
That’s very different from the mass murderer who seeks revenge or to be taken seriously by bringing automatic weapons into a workplace or school. It’s also very different from a serial killer who derives pleasure from the act and/or fame from the cat-and-mouse game with authorities.
Of course, “I did my duty” isn’t nearly as interesting as anything Hannibal Lecter or the like has to say. But it’s also more realistic.
FWIW...
Fair dues! I've got a bunch of ones that I've mined so far above too (thank you to everyone whose contributed so far lol)
I'm just spit-balling most of these until something's a good fit. Once I know for sure what I'm going with, I'll let everyone know, lol
-
If you really want to see into the mind of war criminals, I can't recommend the movie "Conspiracy" enough. Branagh's performance was chilling...
-
If you really want to see into the mind of war criminals, I can't recommend the movie "Conspiracy" enough. Branagh's performance was chilling...
Conspiracy, though they are war criminals in it, to me strikes as more of a movie about genocide. Which is a war crime, but there are different kinds of war criminals with different motivations. I don't want to break any rules on the board by going too in-depth on the subject. It's a very good movie, however. lol
-Some War Criminals do it for a 'love' of their state/nation/country.
-Some War Criminals do it because they have endless personal ambition, and want to progress their career.
-Some War Criminals do it out of hatred of the other, rather than love of the former.
-Some War Criminals do it out of ignorance of what the crime itself is, or the belief that they'll be shielded, and that their decision was the best at the time to help their own or hide their mistakes. (You can see examples of this in modern conflicts, again, can't go into many details)
-Hell, some of them simply do it because it was the most expedient way to achieve their most immediate objectives. "To save the village, you must destroy the village"
I'd argue that Conspiracy really mostly shows their hatred or their 'love' of their nation, with only a few of the characters showing the former.
There is a broad swathe of people that fall under this general idea. Which is interesting as well! They are as diverse as any other kind of criminal. Which is one reason why I'm going over all the responses and trying to narrow them down :)
-
Branagh's character was absolutely all about personal ambition, and more than one of the others were too. But yes, details would definitely head into Rule 4 territory.
-
Branagh's character was absolutely all about personal ambition, and more than one of the others were too. But yes, details would definitely head into Rule 4 territory.
-Some War Criminals do it for a 'love' of their state/nation/country.
"War Crimes? How can they be crimes? They were given the Traitor's due."
-Some War Criminals do it because they have endless personal ambition, and want to progress their career.
"Stop calling them War Crimes. These bars on my neck? They were earned with those actions."
-Some War Criminals do it out of hatred of the other, rather than love of the former.
"I'd hardly call them crimes. You can only commit crimes against our citizens. Those animals are not."
-Some War Criminals do it out of ignorance of what the crime itself is, or the belief that they'll be shielded, and that their decision was the best at the time to help their own or hide their mistakes.
"It was their fault. They're the ones who put their base near a civilian target. It was the only way."
-Hell, some of them simply do it because it was the most expedient way to achieve their most immediate objectives.
"The coalteral damage was unfortunate, but necessary to achieve our goals in a reasonable timeframe."
Just as a few examples. The people who would say these things are all pretty different from one another, but they're all still criminals. lol
-
Good examples all! :thumbsup:
-
-Some War Criminals do it for a 'love' of their state/nation/country.
"War Crimes? How can they be crimes? They were given the Traitor's due."
-Some War Criminals do it because they have endless personal ambition, and want to progress their career.
"Stop calling them War Crimes. These bars on my neck? They were earned with those actions."
-Some War Criminals do it out of hatred of the other, rather than love of the former.
"I'd hardly call them crimes. You can only commit crimes against our citizens. Those animals are not."
Whatever works for your fictional character is your business. But my point was/is that these kinds of war criminals are rare if they exist at all, and then usually only at the top of the chain of command where the killing isn’t actually done (only ordered).
If you are aware and conscious enough to think through and justify a war crime through your own personal ambition or the dehumanization of your victims, then you’re probably going to have a hard time committing the act in the first place. Most people will not carry out such an immoral act when rationalized in such immoral terms.
“I deserved it” or “they deserved it” are more characteristic of pathological criminal minds, which don’t last long in militaries anyway, as they will prey upon friend and foe alike. War crimes usually require a more detached mindset.
-Some War Criminals do it out of ignorance of what the crime itself is, or the belief that they'll be shielded, and that their decision was the best at the time to help their own or hide their mistakes.
"It was their fault. They're the ones who put their base near a civilian target. It was the only way."
-Hell, some of them simply do it because it was the most expedient way to achieve their most immediate objectives.
"The coalteral damage was unfortunate, but necessary to achieve our goals in a reasonable timeframe."
These are closer to the mindset of most historical/real-world war criminals. The acts are still atrocious but justified amorally — in the absence of a sense of right and wrong — not immorally by claiming that an evil is actually a good.
“I did my duty.”
“It’s what the CO ordered.”
“I was following the NCO’s lead.”
“I was just going along with the rest of the unit.”
“It didn’t bother me or my company.”
“I’m not proud of it, but it doesn’t haunt me today, either.”
Etc. I won’t belabor the point but you get the idea. FWIW...
-
Whatever works for your fictional character is your business. But my point was/is that these kinds of war criminals are rare if they exist at all, and then usually only at the top of the chain of command where the killing isn’t actually done (only ordered).
If you are aware and conscious enough to think through and justify a war crime through your own personal ambition or the dehumanization of your victims, then you’re probably going to have a hard time committing the act in the first place. Most people will not carry out such an immoral act when rationalized in such immoral terms.
“I deserved it” or “they deserved it” are more characteristic of pathological criminal minds, which don’t last long in militaries anyway, as they will prey upon friend and foe alike. War crimes usually require a more detached mindset.
These are closer to the mindset of most historical/real-world war criminals. The acts are still atrocious but justified amorally — in the absence of a sense of right and wrong — not immorally by claiming that an evil is actually a good.
“I did my duty.”
“It’s what the CO ordered.”
“I was following the NCO’s lead.”
“I was just going along with the rest of the unit.”
“It didn’t bother me or my company.”
“I’m not proud of it, but it doesn’t haunt me today, either.”
Etc. I won’t belabor the point but you get the idea. FWIW...
I think you're also thinking War Criminals can only exist in the modern era.
Take a look at the list of atrocities caused by the Mongols, Huns, and other extreme invading armies prior to modern warfare, and those would definitely be war crimes as well. Genghis Khan is probably the worst war criminal in history, and despite being an evil tyrant and monster, he also had policies that kept people on side.
Again, without breaking some of the rules on the forum, there are plenty of War Criminals that are just truly sick people, even when they turn on their own. It doesn't take long to find them. I agree with you that there in the minority, but people tend to rise and fall from their positions based on a ton of circumstances. Even if someone's an evil monster, if they are taking care of the most immediate problems of the organization, that might get ignored. More than a few monsters accrued power this way.
Even in my native country, we had an air force officer of high rank, who may not have been committing war crimes, but was a serial killer and other serial thing. He was regarded relatively well by his colleagues, despite taking joy in the suffering of others.
The truth is, people are complicated. I've not decided what I'm doing yet, but it's not so cut and dry. These people can survive under the right conditions, sadly, more than you think :(
-
See? Right here in the SOP, under contingencies.
-
"Oh yes, it's all very fine to drop fire and shrapnel on a city, but you shoot ONE man with unjacketed lead and you're suddenly a war criminal!"
-
6. If violence wasn’t your last resort, you failed to resort to enough of it.
16. Your name is in the mouth of others: be sure it has teeth.
20. If you're not willing to shell your own position, you're not willing to win.
27. Don't be afraid to be the first to resort to violence.
37. There is no 'overkill.' There is only 'open fire' and 'I need to reload.'
Amended: There is no "overkill." There is only "open fire" and "reload."
59. "Two wrongs is probably not going to be enough."
Lots of the 70 maxims could be made 8nto something suitably war criminal-ish
-
I think you're also thinking War Criminals can only exist in the modern era.
By definition, that’s true. The kind of international law and bodies needed to define and persecute war crimes did not exist in the Dark Ages, for example.
Take a look at the list of atrocities caused by the Mongols, Huns, and other extreme invading armies prior to modern warfare, and those would definitely be war crimes as well. Genghis Khan is probably the worst war criminal in history
Those are not the most straightforward examples. The Mongols and the Huns were not genocidal, for example.
But I’ll give you a couple other examples that are more straightforward in supporting your case.
Julius Caesar sought the extermination of the Gauls in modern-day France. He literally and proudly wrote back to Rome about how his campaign was killing “a million” Gauls.
Charlemagne sought the extermination of the Saxons in modern-day Germany. He literally ordered the execution by sword of nearly 5,000 surrendered Saxons at the Massacre of Verden.
But these are extraordinary — in both a good and bad sense — men.
Unless your character is taking on a similar place in the BT universe (Great House Lord, March Lord, etc.), he is among the rank-and-file in Caesar’s legions or Charlemagne’s host.
And those legions and that host were not composed of thousands of mass murderers and serial killers. Rather, they were composed of legionnaires, cavalry, and footmen who were doing their duty for Caesar, Emperor, payment in salt, payment in coin, feudal title/holding, or so they could just get back home.
They didn’t possess Caesar’s ridiculously outsized ambition or Charlemagne’s political and religious zeal. They were just getting the job done.
Again, if you want to portray your character as immoral and evil, go for it. It’s probably more interesting and certainly easier from a storytelling point of view.
I’m just saying that most war criminals in the kind of position your character likely occupies are amoral, not immoral, and they don’t even know it. It’s not evil geniuses, but the banality of everyday evil that makes war crimes possible.
Even in my native country, we had an air force officer of high rank, who may not have been committing war crimes, but was a serial killer and other serial thing.
This is my point.
That was a career serial killer who somehow managed to also maintain a career in the military. He would have been an immoral murderer no matter where he went or what he did.
That psychology is very different from the average war criminal. War criminals are not murderers outside the wartime environments they’re placed in and the wartime commands they’re given. It is that unique combination of extreme circumstance and unthinking conscience that turns them into amoral murderers.
Maybe what you’re looking for is not necessarily a war criminal, but rather a murderer who also happens to be a soldier.
FWIW...
-
That psychology is very different from the average war criminal. War criminals are not murderers outside the wartime environments they’re placed in and the wartime commands they’re given. It is that unique combination of extreme circumstance and unthinking conscience that turns them into amoral murderers.
Maybe what you’re looking for is not necessarily a war criminal, but rather a murderer who also happens to be a soldier.
FWIW...
I only made that post to prove a point that there is a large volume of people who commit war crimes. Most of the quotes I've mined so far don't really have anything to do with that. This has become a sticking point because you've made it, in your posts, seem like such a person is disqualified. I'm just saying that quotes of that nature aren't disqualified, and gave valid reasons as to why they aren't. That's all I'm saying.
-
Of course, “I did my duty” isn’t nearly as interesting as anything Hannibal Lecter or the like has to say. But it’s also more realistic.
FWIW...
I just rephrased and shortened a bit from Colonel Jessup's speech from "A Few Good Men." IIRC, it was part of his actual defense.
-
War Criminals dont actually have to do anything wrong. I personally know a guy who was convicted of a war crime, because he wouldnt testify against other people in his unith. I also know of at least one war crimes investigation started because a reporter overheard a comment made in the back of a truck.
What civilians consider war crimes today are driven by ignorance and and an even more ignorant media. Ignorant of the Laws of Land Warfare, ignorant of the whole situation, ignorant of rules of engagement.
In Battletech they have the Ares Conventions, but even those get put aside for the sake of victory. Without the threat of a higher power to enforce a universal standard, the accusation will most likely come from the loser, and justice will depend on actually winning the war.
And yes there is gallows humor about war crimes, just like every other thing in the world.
-
And we've crossed over into the Rule 4 stuff that we shouldn't be talking about.
-
"It was far too remote to make a good demonstration, but we got to the objective eventually."
"Victory solves all problems."
"I'm a evil monster, without illusions for what I do but it must be done."
We do get several House units, let alone mercenary units, that do not seem to care about collateral damage. The 8th Orloff Grenadiers according to the Chaos Irregulars are known for a heavy fist. But they say the same about the Lyran unit on guard near Son Hoa- smash a target and worry not about the peons. The Death Commandos very much are in the vein of 'I followed orders' level of war criminals, and intentionally so in the source material- its how they get the fanatical rating.
Sort of off, but b/c the mercs answer to the MRB/MRBC and always have to be on guard to a employer trying to rip them off- IMO the average merc is LESS likely to commit a war crime. And outside of the Kell Hounds, they do not have a House to shelter them.
-
The number of times that the GDL broke a contract to avoid war crimes suggests that most merc units aren't as fussy.
-
What were war crimes they were not deceived into executing? Sorry your statement is a bit conflicted.
-
"It was far too remote to make a good demonstration, but we got to the objective eventually."
"Dantooine is too remote to make an effective demonstration, but don't worry. We will deal with your rebel friends soon enough"
-
Lol, it was too many words . . . I was shortening the first and last as they were longer lines in movies.
-
What were war crimes they were not deceived into executing? Sorry your statement is a bit conflicted.
Tactics of Duty was the big one that I remember.
-
Lol, it was too many words . . . I was shortening the first and last as they were longer lines in movies.
+1
I mangled it, so google helped me out. I realize how bad my memory is getting now!
-
"Prisoners, lieutenant? After what they just put us through? We didn't take any Prisoners, understand?"
"Prisoners? Superb. Find out what they know, and then shoot them. Report on anything useful."
"Doesn't matter if civies are in the AoP. Orders are to level that block. Level it."
"What do you mean that area wasn't the target? No, it didn't look like a school to me."
-
War crimes? If they didn't want to die, they shouldn't have been in rebellion.
or some variation
If they didn't want to die they shouldn't have been on the planet where the leaders rebelled
OOC I have trouble with the mindset. involved in trying to blame the victims
-
Typically, for BTU we are talking about indiscriminate use of firepower and indifference of of collateral damage- I burned down the house but by God the spider is dead. And sometimes its what ends up as collateral damage, in one of the FCCW novels, the POV character who is a battalion commander for the New Syrtis Fusiliers gets upset because the attacking Katherine loyalists start shattering the ice art of the Hasek Memorial . . . and to survive he has to fire back.
Then we got the St Ives militia tanker who was not sure if his infernos were the ones lighting off some wooden village on Nashur. His lance leader was blaming a Capellan for such a war crime-esque action, it rocked him that it was someone from his side. I also seem to remember a FRR unit that swore death to a Invasion Wolf cluster commander (Crusader, what a surprise) for his actions during the invasion of the world they were defending which caused a lot of collateral damage the Clan warrior was indifferent in creating. The FRR unit eventually launched a unsanctioned raid to smash the Wolf cluster in the 60s- lol, the cluster had been disbanded.
War crimes can be more than just killing or destroying indiscriminately . . . a commander could order his medical support to use prisoners as non-voluntary organ/blood donors if medical support was low. The prisoners could survive, though be mutilated or with long lasting health problems . . . so they are not dead, but its extremely grisly and a abuse of prisoners. While normally a human rights violation and could be considered a crime against humanity, because it was done as part of a military operation makes it a war crime.
Making prisoners build defensive works or in 'defense industries' is IIRC a war crime, b/c they are not supposed to be compelled to labor against their own countries . . . but its a minor one, can easily be worked around, and is fuzzy thinking . . . if a nation does not have to commit available labor to harvesting crops, then they can shift that labor to say building bombs. The product, food, would even find its way into feeding troops or the labor that builds weapons . . . or does not require food rations to be shifted to feed prisoners.
But for a BT commander we are talking about killing civilians or prisoners.
Btw, being made a prisoner is not a right and under certain conditions a military commander will be compelled not to take prisoners. As mentioned earlier, a lot of this is a modern conceit and we can get into more of the theory of modern use in PMs.
-
OOC I have trouble with the mindset. involved in trying to blame the victims
Just means you still have your humanity intact ;)
And sometimes its what ends up as collateral damage, in one of the FCCW novels, the POV character who is a battalion commander for the New Syrtis Fusiliers gets upset because the attacking Katherine loyalists start shattering the ice art of the Hasek Memorial . . . and to survive he has to fire back.
This is a good point. I'm not an expert, but IIRC, just attacking and destroying protected cultural heritage sites is a war crime IRL, even if no deaths result.
Making prisoners build defensive works or in 'defense industries' is IIRC a war crime, b/c they are not supposed to be compelled to labor against their own countries . . . but its a minor one, can easily be worked around, and is fuzzy thinking . . . if a nation does not have to commit available labor to harvesting crops, then they can shift that labor to say building bombs.
They could, but they'd have to be stupid or desperate. That's just begging to have bombs that don't work, or that work but at the wrong time, like when they're being loaded on a transport or something.
-
I never said it was a smart thing to do . . . I tried to find a story I heard once about a shell not going off, and instead of explosive filler it had a note saying the worker was sorry, they tried to ruin more shells but could only do a few when the guards were not looking.
-
War Criminals dont actually have to do anything wrong. I personally know a guy who was convicted of a war crime, because he wouldnt testify against other people in his unith. I also know of at least one war crimes investigation started because a reporter overheard a comment made in the back of a truck.
What civilians consider war crimes today are driven by ignorance and and an even more ignorant media. Ignorant of the Laws of Land Warfare, ignorant of the whole situation, ignorant of rules of engagement.
In Battletech they have the Ares Conventions, but even those get put aside for the sake of victory. Without the threat of a higher power to enforce a universal standard, the accusation will most likely come from the loser, and justice will depend on actually winning the war.
And yes there is gallows humor about war crimes, just like every other thing in the world.
What if the laws change - is this also considered a war crime?
I had once a discussion with some people and we read the Hague Conventions (1899 and 1907) and the Geneva Conventions (1949) and we found that certain actions were considered allowed by the Hague Conventions but forbidden by the Geneva Convention. No, no one of us was or is a lawyer so we look and read them as civilians.
And then we have the question if a side allows that a soldier of the other side may use the Conventions as excuse or not.
(Yes, this has a base in history. I wrote a Battletech story and the first draft contained two people. One german, who was convicted as a war criminal and a dutch officer. The german officer was fighting the dutch insurgency against the german occupation of the Netherlands and he did not employ the Marquis of Queensberry rules. After the war he was sentenced to death and his excuse that the Hague Conventions allowed certain behaviour was dismissed by two dutch courts as the occopation of the Netherlands was illegal and therefore the germans could not argue with the Hague Conventions. Meanwhile the dutch were fighting against the insurgency in one of the colonies and at least one officer did not use the Marquis of Queensberry rules either. No, he was not as ruthless as the german. He was not charged even though the people of the area wanted to prosecute him. )
-
TAG'd for reference.
-
What if the laws change - is this also considered a war crime?
Well that gets to the heart of War Crimes. Laws retroactively applied. If you lose and are conquered, not much you could do about it. If you win, not much interest in prosecuting your own side with existing laws, much less creating new ones. Nobody seemed too upset about fire bombing civilian cities in WW 2 for example (Dresden, Tokyo being the most famous), though not a war crime at the time, I'm sure a segment of the west would drop their vodka and start the protests.
The Law of Land Warfare allows for a wide variety of actions that might surprise people though, of course, as I was told once, you just have to justify it in the investigation. And some governments just dont want to hear anything that doesnt fit their preconcieved notions of right and wrong. This includes some clowns actually in uniform. but we digress. More quotable quotes as a war criminal:
"It aint nuthin to kill a bus load of people"- actually a Get of Fenris quote, but Ive always like the Get's straight forward attitude.
-
" Pirate? Me... If a profit was made, it was made in liberties, not profiteering, eh? "
Truetanker
-
War crimes exist when winners need to kill more losers, after the war ends.
-
... the fact a number of use are actually arguing over what counts as a war crime is a little troubling.
Anyway, back to the fictional character and fictional setting.
"... and they call me a monster? How ironic."
-
... the fact a number of use are actually arguing over what counts as a war crime is a little troubling.
I was a soldier and never believed in the validity of war crimes; when initiating war is a crime, trying to regulate war is just absurd.
-
War criminals on the winning side are sometimes seen as heroes.
"You weren't there! You don't know what it is to make command decisions in the field. That wasn't a school. It was an indoctrination center. Those "civilians" you're whining about had improvised explosives and had killed my men and would have killed more if we hadn't put a stop to it by leveling their city. That's war. I had command, I dealt with it as I saw fit."
-
I was a soldier and never believed in the validity of war crimes; when initiating war is a crime, trying to regulate war is just absurd.
I never served, only can go by accounts of a old co-worker who did but his isn't the place to post what he shared with me and the guys.
All the same, I was half joking when I posted consider a number of players here considering leveling a city or orbital bombardment a sound tactic. Thus my following quote; in game, you guys make the Clans look like Care Bears.
Don't believe this is the right venues to discus the real world applications of the term war crime without it, at best, coming of as callous while discussing/arguing actual trails and treaties would wondering into the Rule 4 mine field.
-
I was a soldier and never believed in the validity of war crimes; when initiating war is a crime, trying to regulate war is just absurd.
Jus ad bellum is completely different than jus in bello. Both are covered at the staff college level, and neither is absurd.
-
'In War, Law is silent'
Just War, Laws of War, and other modern creations are attempts to bring civilized principles to what is a atavistic and barbarian action, often ignoring the two most important factors- winning and surviving. Most of what people consider the laws of war, especially as laid out by the Geneva Conventions, deal with enlightened self-interest . . . we treat enemy prisoners of war well because we want our prisoners treated well. If they are not treated well, then the principle of reprisal comes into play.
The Ares Conventions attempted to limit the destructiveness of BT's space-age warfare . . . and have been pretty successful, in part b/c of the nature of the universe. After all if both sides of a war resorted to dropping rocks on inhabited planets (easiest way to take out Hesperus . . . ), it would not require putting battlemechs on the ground to let them fight as we do on the table top.
Which leaves us with war crimes of killing prisoners, killing civilians, destroying cultural artifacts, and mass destruction of civilian property.
So . . .
'Death March? How else does a infantry division get to a prison camp?'
-
“I did my duty.”
That. Followed by a other common excuses like "I merely followed orders." Or: "They weren't innocent." And: "Their resisting our occupation was illegal."
-
I was talking to my wife about this topic last night and how someone mentioned the difference between serial killers and war criminals. My wife having studied serial killers, she mentioned that most of them have some kind of psychological problem leading to those actions.
With that being said OP, do you intend your character to have a psychological problem? If so, what past experiences your character had may have influenced it?
-
I was talking to my wife about this topic last night and how someone mentioned the difference between serial killers and war criminals. My wife having studied serial killers, she mentioned that most of them have some kind of psychological problem leading to those actions.
With that being said OP, do you intend your character to have a psychological problem? If so, what past experiences your character had may have influenced it?
I think what the prior individual was alluding to, was that some of the quotes given so far could only come from someone with an anti-social personality disorder.
I'm not really sure what the character's backstory would fully be, as I don't want to commit too much to an idea when so much of who they are is going to be determined by others. I'm just mining for 15 word quotes that might fit. As shown so far, I'm not really fussy on if its some kind of heinous monster, or someone whose just made a mistake, or someone who was really pushed into a bad position. :)
-
'In War, Law is silent'
Just to point this out, this phrase was not originally meant as a justification or had to do with war crimes at all originally -- it came from Marcus Tullius Cicero's speech during his courtroom defense of Titus Annius Milo, and he was using it to lament the circumstances of the trial, that an armed mob was ringing the Forum to influence the trial's outcome in favor of a conviction of Milo (Milo stood accused of murdering Publius Clodius Pulcher, and the mob -- a increasingly common feature of Roman politics in that day -- was raised by Clodius' supporters to intimidate the judges. Sadly, the gambit worked and Milo was convicted and sentenced to exile). The actual translation of "Silent enim lēgēs inter arma" is more like "When confronted by force of arms, the law falls silent"
Never mind the struck-through passage, I had misremembered my history. It's still not a justification for war crimes, but what Cicero was doing was painting Milo's alleged murder of Clodius as an act of self-defense, basically saying that "when your life is threatened, certain things that would otherwise be illegal should not be seen as such". He still certainly wasn't intending its common use today as "in war, the ends justify the means".
Just War, Laws of War, and other modern creations
Not sure I'd call St. Augustine of Hippo "modern"... :)
-
When looking at the conduct of war, I consider things the Assyrians and other ancients did in the course of war . . . so yeah, philosophy presented within the last 500-1000 years? While the Theory of Just War might be older, it was IMO not really embraced until we started to get into mass media, PR and public opinion. While a king might have considered it a Just War to fight for the claim on a crown that stood vacant against other royal claimants, it does not match up with current Just War justifications.
Here is another one using history for the character-
'Leave one in ten with a eye to lead the rest back to their comrades.'
-
'Leave one in ten with a eye to lead the rest back to their comrades.'
Ah the Byzantines. True gentlemen, that lot.
-
Just War theory is jus ad bellum. International Humanitarian Law (IHL)/Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC) is jus in bello. Training in the latter is a treaty obligation of the 1949 Geneva Conventions.
-
Leaning a bit into the idea that this character isn’t a mustache twirling comic book or Saturday morning TV villain. That they are someone more in the “I don’t see what was so wrong with what I did,” crowd:
I’d say pick a particular war crime and/or ...inconsiderate... method of waging war. We can workshop a 15 word summary from that with more success.
-Called in orbital strike on enemy forces in spite of civilians?
-Burned down a wildlife preserve (or just any forest) to overheat enemy mechs?
-Used fougasse mines in a city?
-Used civilians as a shield to prevent enemy from bringing full might to bear?
-
Just War theory is jus ad bellum. International Humanitarian Law (IHL)/Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC) is jus in bello. Training in the latter is a treaty obligation of the 1949 Geneva Conventions.
I checked off those death-by-power-point lectures every year too. And the additional crap from RoE. IMO, a lot of what is done is b/c of mass media & PR, having been in from 99-11 with a knowledge of history and dealt with the fall out of things that happened in the world I have strong opinions on it, like MAZB, that cannot discuss details outside of PMs b/c Rule #4.
IF BT is really the Renaissance/Age of Enlightenment with fresh make up, then some of the more modern Rules are out the window- especially as the Ares Conventions have lapsed. Do you really want to try to convince me Stone's crew took average MD prisoners? To be honest, I am not even sure I like that high-profile Blakists got Nuremberg'd.
-
I can assure you the classes where I teach aren't death by power point these days. I don't think our students would disagree. I came in back in '93, and have five more years to go.
-
“Civilian casualties? You mean collateral damage?”
“They choose to surrender; I choose to keep shooting,”
“War crimes? How is securing victory criminal?”
“Prisoner up too many resources to secure; that’s why I took none,”
-
The only war criminals are those who lose the war.
Throw me to the wolves? Try it. Fool, I lead the damned pack!
The last idiots who charged me with war crimes disappeared. Funny, how that works, eh?
You cannot pass judgement on gods or generals; At war, I am no mere general.
-
"oops."
-
What if the laws change - is this also considered a war crime?
Well that gets to the heart of War Crimes. Laws retroactively applied. If you lose and are conquered, not much you could do about it. If you win, not much interest in prosecuting your own side with existing laws, much less creating new ones. Nobody seemed too upset about fire bombing civilian cities in WW 2 for example (Dresden, Tokyo being the most famous), though not a war crime at the time, I'm sure a segment of the west would drop their vodka and start the protests.
The Law of Land Warfare allows for a wide variety of actions that might surprise people though, of course, as I was told once, you just have to justify it in the investigation. And some governments just dont want to hear anything that doesnt fit their preconcieved notions of right and wrong. This includes some clowns actually in uniform. but we digress. More quotable quotes as a war criminal:
"It aint nuthin to kill a bus load of people"- actually a Get of Fenris quote, but Ive always like the Get's straight forward attitude.
yay Get of Frenzy. I Kinda prefer playing Shadowlord myself.
-
Anyone say . . .
'Kill them all, God will know his own.' A version of what was said after a massacre/war crime.
Edit- added
'Judging by the slaughter on the battlefield it was suggested that the soldiers simply went berserk.'
-
The story I heard regarding your first quote was it was a Catholic priest giving advice to a military commander during the Cathar Heresy. They were under orders to kill all the Cathars in the city and the commander wanted to know how to tell the city inhabitants apart, to which the Priest said, "Kill them all, God will know his own".
-
"Massacre? I fought a war - a successful war - and you're going on about massacres?"
"The only crime was we didn't kill all of them when my men had the chance."
-
The story I heard regarding your first quote was it was a Catholic priest giving advice to a military commander during the Cathar Heresy. They were under orders to kill all the Cathars in the city and the commander wanted to know how to tell the city inhabitants apart, to which the Priest said, "Kill them all, God will know his own".
Yeah, to me its one of the more horrifying quotes out there . . . but religious wars get pretty nasty- religious wars, civil war, and peasant/slave rebellions kind of tie for 'biggest war crime creator.'
-
Civil wars and strife are the worse as they are so much more personal.
-
"It's Not My Fault"
-
"They can only condemn us for what we have done, because we did it, and because we did it, we succeeded, and they are alive as a result."
-
"I was following orders."
Or...
"You don't understand... They were not as human as you or I."
-
My character isn’t exactly on the moral high ground either. I’m trying to hammer the following into something a bit better:
“ComStar lost so many at Tukayyid. For what? To leave them be? Word of Blake won’t make that mistake.”
-
My character isn’t exactly on the moral high ground either. I’m trying to hammer the following into something a bit better:
“ComStar lost so many at Tukayyid. For what? To leave them be? Word of Blake won’t make that mistake.”
'Tukayyid's losses still haunt me. By Blake, the Star League should plant them all.' Lol, pre-67 quote and a peak into someone who turns their hatred of the Clans to the member states of the Star League for their betrayal.
-
'Tukayyid's losses still haunt me. By Blake, the Star League should plant them all.' Lol, pre-67 quote and a peak into someone who turns their hatred of the Clans to the member states of the Star League for their betrayal.
I submitted something similar to my original quote when I was done. The fact that you got my intent clearly from the quote was positive reinforcement that the quote hit the intent in the head.
-
Yeah, I was just trying to cut it down to the 15 words . . . letting my wife pick them for the toddler, lol.